The end of the Watkins Trade, "use that 1st to draft a QB" BS

[Kirby Jackson]

 

I thought the rule was not to judge players until they've completed 2 NFL seasons. Furthermore, the picks Cleveland acquired won't be known for another 6+ months, and they won't have 2 seasons under their belt until the end of 2016.

 

No one's arguing Watkins isn't fantastic or a special player. The question is whether or not he's worth 2 1sts and a 4th. And, from a team-building perspective, would it have been better to sit at 9, take Odell Beckham, and kept that 1st and 4th? Well, we don't know right now and have to see how it plays out, despite early good returns.

Sitting at 9 meant Ebron though. The Bills have been forthcoming with that. Edited October 22, 2014 by Kirby Jackson

[Rob's House]

 

Yeah, I also used the words "propensity" and "mode".

 

Apparently knowing the vocabulary of my own job, that I've been getting paid to do since 10th grade, and applying it properly = hiding?

 

No. The reason why we use these words is simple: predictive modeling is, by definition, predictive. Any number of outliers/one-time events can come along. Example: Pegula fires the entire FO/coaching staff tomorrow. It's possible, and in that edge case, it's now highly unlikely that we go 8-8. But how likely is that? Russel Wilson, and certainly Tom Brady are outliers, therefore, we say "Franchise QBs most likely come from the top 10"....because that is exactly correct.

 

Look: if I don't use definitive terms when I analyze a friggin linear process assembly line, or the daily wire transfer log of a large bank......how the F am I supposed to use them in terms of NFL football?

 

But, I understand your problem: you've been affected, and it's not just you, it's now the majority of sports fans.....by the notion that more than a very small # of "Sports Analytics" people know WTF they are doing, and that we should accept most of them/their work, because.....analytics.

 

 

Now I'm certain you have no clue what is happening here. And, no, it's not that "none of us would understand". It's merely that you've proven you don't understand. Don't speak for the board. There are a lot of smart people here.

 

But, don't let me stop you. Please continue.

 

So you need the top 10 draft pick to get the franchise QB b/c the higher in the draft you pick the better your odds of finding one.

 

And if we went 5-11 we might well have had one of those picks.

 

And if we had EJ Manuel start the whole season we might have gone 5-11.

 

But because we have Kyle Orton we probably finish with a better record and therefore wouldn't have that high pick.

 

But Kyle Orton wasn't in the mix at that time.

 

And without Kyle Orton we'd be up a creek without a QB or the kind of pick you claim to need to acquire one.

 

So you're basically pounding your chest claiming victory because the unforseeable outlier (Orton) prevented the likely scenario others feared, and you're applying knowledge of that outlier retroactively because you claim this situation was inevitable.

 

You normally write sound and logical posts, but this is not your best work.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Rob's House

[Deranged Rhino]

The ONLY way to get a "cant miss QB" in this upcoming draft is by selecting FIRST. Marriota is the best QB since Luck...

 

Call me crazy, but Marriota seems to have a low ceiling in the NFL. I've seen him play a lot, he's good but he's not anywhere close to a sure thing in my mind and certainly isn't on the same level that Luck was when he came out.

[Rob's House]

 

Sitting at 9 meant Ebron though. The Bills have been forthcoming with that.

 

It's hard for the FO to defend the trade based on the argument that they'd have used their original pick poorly if given the chance.

[John from Riverside]

So you need the top 10 draft pick to get the franchise QB b/c the higher in the draft you pick the better your odds of finding one.

 

And if we went 5-11 we might well have had one of those picks.

 

And if we had EJ Manuel start the whole season we might have gone 5-11.

 

But because we have Kyle Orton we probably finish with a better record and therefore wouldn't have that high pick.

 

But Kyle Orton wasn't in the mix at that time.

 

And without Kyle Orton we'd be up a creek without a QB or the kind of pick you claim to need to acquire one.

 

So you're basically pounding your chest claiming victory because the unforseeable outlier (Orton) prevented the likely scenario others feared, and you're applying knowledge of that outlier retroactively because you claim this situation was inevitable.

 

You normally write sound and logical posts, but this is not your best work.

 

I actually think it is some of his best work

 

This team inevitably wins some games it shouldnt to help draft selection....and loses games needed to make the playoffs.....

 

They have been a "middling" team for years

 

I think it is foolish to think that we are anywhere near we need to be in draft selection next year for the QB that everyone perceives we need.....

 

I will take that one step sooner....this team need to stop playing the "draft lottery sweepstakes" and start trying to get into the damn playoffs where anything can happen.

[bonechiller]

Whoa!?~~~, I am so confuuussed d....

[Dawgg]

So you need the top 10 draft pick to get the franchise QB b/c the higher in the draft you pick the better your odds of finding one.

 

And if we went 5-11 we might well have had one of those picks.

 

And if we had EJ Manuel start the whole season we might have gone 5-11.

 

But because we have Kyle Orton we probably finish with a better record and therefore wouldn't have that high pick.

 

But Kyle Orton wasn't in the mix at that time.

 

And without Kyle Orton we'd be up a creek without a QB or the kind of pick you claim to need to acquire one.

 

So you're basically pounding your chest claiming victory because the unforseeable outlier (Orton) prevented the likely scenario others feared, and you're applying knowledge of that outlier retroactively because you claim this situation was inevitable.

 

You normally write sound and logical posts, but this is not your best work.

 

Spot on. Just don't use such big words next time, as folks might not understand what you mean.

[Rob's House]

 

 

I actually think it is some of his best work

 

This team inevitably wins some games it shouldnt to help draft selection....and loses games needed to make the playoffs.....

 

They have been a "middling" team for years

 

I think it is foolish to think that we are anywhere near we need to be in draft selection next year for the QB that everyone perceives we need.....

 

I will take that one step sooner....this team need to stop playing the "draft lottery sweepstakes" and start trying to get into the damn playoffs where anything can happen.

 

I don't disagree, I'm just not sure how it pertains to anything I said.

[GG]

You normally write sound and logical posts, but this is not your best work.

 

Are you referring to the OP?

[MDH]

You presume incorrectly.

 

The style is a neccesary component. Without it, the objective can't be acheived.

 

I suppose I might say, one has to lift the rock, if one seeks to exterminate the critters that hide under them. EDIT: I'm trying to exterminate a premise largely espoused by a specific type of critter. This critter won't respond without....the style.

 

That's because it was preachy, and please, only "a bit"? I'm hurt.

 

So, you're trolling.

[Rob's House]

 

 

Are you referring to the OP?

 

I was. I like OC, even if he is obnoxious and self-aggrandizing on occasion.

[GG]

I was. I like OC, even if he is obnoxious and self-aggrandizing on occasion.

 

On occasion? That's like calling DC Tom subtle.

Edited October 22, 2014 by GG

[Rob's House]

 

 

On occasion? That's like calling DC Tom subtle.

 

I can't argue with this.

[Protocal69]

4-3? Now it's dead as door nail. It's over. You were never right about the Watkins trade(just like you'll never be right about many things....fracking comes to mind). Lay. It. Down.

 

First let me define the premise(read: nonsense) properly. This should take care of any "but I didn't mean/say that" excuses:

 

Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly) to Cleveland, removes(d) the option for the Bills to draft a franchise QB in the first round of 2015's draft.

 

This premise was as nonsensical on the DAY of the 2014 draft as it is today. Yet, on WGR and elsewhere, this nonsense has been said, over and over, by people who seem to struggle in their understanding of the Bills, the AFC East, the draft and the NFL as a whole.

 

Need proof? As of now, the Bills most likely outcome to this season is 8-8. (I know, not a record anyone wants to hear, but this is about math). Please click here: http://www.sportsclu...st/Buffalo.html See the first "What if" chart, find the column labeled "Count", and understand that the largest count, out of 212k simulations is: 8 wins. Are we good? Let's move on then.

 

As many of our informed posters KNEW on draft day, as Whaley said on draft day, our 2015 pick was never going to be in the top 5, and had a very low propensity to be in the top 10. This directly contributed to the decision to make the trade for Watkins.

 

Why is this key fact so important? Answer: because the top 10 is where your franchise QBs are MOST LIKELY to come from, by a lot. And remember the premise: we're supposed to get a FRANCHISE QB with the 1st we gave up. Yes, I am aware of Russel Wilson, and Colin Kapernick. In response, I will remind the strugglers that Wilson was drafted with a 3, Kap with a 2, and we have given NEITHER of those picks to Cleveland for Sammy Watkins. In all cases, the most likely place to get a "franchise QB" remains the top 10.

 

And, let's not forget the cause that is Sammy Watkins, and his now obvious effect...on the value of the draft picks we gave away for him = it drops every week. Given what we've seen of Sammy, it should be obvious that he himself may be a major contributor to keeping us out of the top 15, never mind 10.

 

The Buffalo Bills have always had a minimal chance of drafting in the top 10 in 2015. The defense was simply too good. The O skill players were too good. The O, even in shambles, statistically had more chances to score, with shorter fields to manage, and too many weapons. This is why the premise above has always been statistically absurd. We have 9 games left, and only winning 4 of them, against our remaining schedule, I submit as a VERY pessimistic assessment. But, that's fine, it makes my point. Even with a pessimistic outlook going forward: we were never going to get the QB we wanted with the draft picks we lost.

 

Now, we have a real, not simulated, record of 4-3. We cannot lose those 4 wins. If we assume 8-8, find the chart at the very bottom of the link, find 8 wins in the 1st column, look across to see the mode at 8 is 26, find the column heading 17-->as of today, we are most likely to draft at 16. (The reverse order of the chart) Which QB, who is better than EJ, would we have been able to draft at 16 in 2015? Answer: nobody. We already drafted a QB at 16, didn't we? This premise has always relied on the magical thinking that a franchise QB was going to get past the top 5, never mind down to 16, and that is why it's absurd. The Bills were never a top 5 team, very unlkely to be a top 10 team, and now, by the most likely #s, we aren't even a top 15 team.

 

 

Now.....enough with this ridiculous crap. It was never right, and with each passing day, it gets more absurd. Every win makes me smile for lots of reasons. The tiniest reason I smile? It continues to prove the silliness of the premise above, and those who said/keep saying it.

 

 

This has been a great day for posters I see. This is what I have been saying all along give or take and your articulated your point very well +1

[John from Riverside]

I can't argue with this.

 

Me neither...

[Kemp]

Easily the most obnoxious post I have read here, to date.

 

No one can be certain how this will turn out. No matter how great a WR becomes, a good starting QB will always be more valuable.

 

We won't know what Buffalo could have gotten next season until next season.

[Kelly the Dog]

Whaley made a point when the trade was made to make it about the QB and that he wanted to give EJ every weapon he could to help him progress. I never believed that was really the reason for the trade, and if it were it was a dumb reason. I think he was just doing some PR type stuff that GMs and guys in sports management do every day. The fact is, we were going to have Sammy Watkins for 5-6 and hopefully 10+ years regardless of the QB, and he was going to make every QB he played with significantly better because of his sheer talent.

 

It didn't matter one bit that Orton wasn't on the team or in the plans then, or that EJ was the guy then. The trade was made because Watkins was a generational player, a sure thing, the highest player on their board, and a star in the making with a great attitude and demeanor. The QB issue was immaterial.

[l< j]

I'm the Douchebag.

 

We agree on something, anyways.

 

Right or wrong about the trade (and I like the trade), you are engaging in behavior that really isn't about dialogue and exchange of ideas and information. It's about you. You're right and everyone else can't see that and deserves to be called out.

 

This post violates the spirit of the TBD terms of service, although not the letter:

 

TBD hopes to foster a healthy exchange of views about the Buffalo Bills.

We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.

Just become someone doesn't share your opinion - doesn't make them an idiot.

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

 

I bring this up not to flag this thread for the moderators (I'm not one) or to argue for its removal (I don't). I'm just pointing out that, no matter how valid your point, you aren't doing anything to foster a healthy exchange, and you are doing a great deal to provoke a fight (one that you have already decided you've won, despite the fact that you appear to be shadowboxing). Change your tone. The board will be better for it.

 

kj

[GG]

It didn't matter one bit that Orton wasn't on the team or in the plans then, or that EJ was the guy then. The trade was made because Watkins was a generational player, a sure thing, the highest player on their board, and a star in the making with a great attitude and demeanor. The QB issue was immaterial.

 

This is where I disagree. Yes, it's obvious there was a lot of OBD spin after the draft. But the clear downside to the trade at the time was a complete meltdown by EJ, which would have left the team without a high pick in 2015. So we have to credit Whaley for going hard after Orton to make sure there would not be a complete meltdown. (Which of course has nothing to do with OC's argument)

[Kelly the Dog]

 

 

This is where I disagree. Yes, it's obvious there was a lot of OBD spin after the draft. But the clear downside to the trade at the time was a complete meltdown by EJ, which would have left the team without a high pick in 2015. So we have to credit Whaley for going hard after Orton to make sure there would not be a complete meltdown. (Which of course has nothing to do with OC's argument)

I agree with what you say about orton. I was furious with DW for not addressing the backup QB position, although he finally did in enough time. But even that didn't matter. That was a separate issue. He was failing in that regard at the time but he cleared it up. I wasn't even talking about this year. I was talking about this year and the next and the next and the next, etc. When we have no idea who the QB will be (and having Sammy Watkins here will be a HUGE draw to any prospective FA QB or trade partner).